Examination of Witnesses (Questions 169-179)
MR JEFF
WEST AND
MR STEPHEN
TROW
WEDNESDAY 3 JULY 2002
Chairman
169. Mr West, you are the Director of Conservation
Management at English Heritage, and Mr Trow, you are the Head
of Countryside Policy. We do not often see English Heritage, but
we thought we would have a little bit of a change of scenery and
have a slightly different perspective on this, so that is why
you are here. And what we are anxious to find out is whether DEFRA
really has established a clear identity and a clear sense of purpose
and knows what it is about and whether it is able to deliver it.
You are quite complimentary about the establishment of the sort
of new persona of DEFRA, but you enter a sort of quibble, as it
were, or qualm, when you talk about the conservation of the historic
environment, and you think that really that does not seem, that
has sort of fallen through the hole, or has not really been given
the sort of importance it merits. Would you just like to tell
me what your concerns are, in that regard?
(Mr West) I think the main point we want to make here
is, first, that MAFF was already taking a much more positive point
of view, from our point of view, even before DEFRA was set up,
and that, since it has been set up, it has been able to build
on that, and we have found a lot of very useful doors have been
opening, in parts of Whitehall that had previously been closed
to us. It is terribly important that they do open, of course,
because the historic environment exists every bit as much in the
countryside as it does in the towns, and the sorts of policies
that DEFRA are responsible for can be absolutely critical in affecting
the future of the historic environment in England. We were very
pleased, incidentally, that DEFRA was involved in and associated
itself with the Government's statement on the future of the historic
environment, that was published last December, "A Force for
our Future", and I think there are some very encouraging
early indications that DEFRA is going to take this seriously.
But there is a long way to go, on that side.
170. But there are some intentions, are there
not, there, because, if we take the planning area, we are told
that the fundamental Spending Review is going to contain serious
liberalisation of the planning rules in the countryside, that
was the voices on the grapevine; and we have also been told, earlier
on, that DEFRA had practically no input at all into the Government's
review of planning, which has just been commented on by one of
our fellow Committees. So, in the sense of getting the rural activity
and economy going, people always say, "These planning rules
are a real pain, they can't do anything, they're rigid, very difficult
to convert, change of use is difficult, business rates chip in,
and we're absolutely frozen." But, from the point of view
of wanting to make sure that the historic environment is maintained
it does require planning rules to be used sensibly. When you have
objectives which may be in conflict within the Department, how
are they resolved?
(Mr West) It is certainly true that, in order to manage
change in the historic environment intelligently, you do need
a sensitive and effective planning system, and, indeed, to achieve
DEFRA's own objectives on the rural agenda and on the environmental
agenda, they too will need an effective and sensitive planning
system. Sensitive and intelligent does not mean necessarily lots
of controls, it means an intelligent system that actually attempts
to reconcile all the different competing interests, which are
obviously involved in managing change. Nobody, least of all English
Heritage, imagines that change can or should be stopped, we are
not in the business of fossilising the countryside, any more than
we are in the business of fossilising individual historic buildings,
we are interested in the business of identifying what is significant
about the historic environment and making sure that what is significant,
the things people value about it, is sustained effectively for
the future. Which is, incidentally, one reason why the historic
environment is a key part of delivering sustainable development,
or sustainability, the ideas in the whole concept of sustainable
development, in which DEFRA is obviously in the lead, are very
much the ideas that we wish to see applied in managing change
to the historic environment, namely, the long-term view actually
taking into account the need to sustain for the future the things
that people actually value.
Mr Borrow
171. As the Chairman said, you are quite complimentary
on the changes that were being made when DEFRA was established.
I wonder to what extent you feel that the establishment of DEFRA
was important, in terms of changing the culture that existed in
the old MAFF and the parts of DETR that came across when it was
established?
(Mr Trow) Yes, I think we felt that the problems with
MAFF were that it was very fixated on the farming industry, and
that the environmental and rural development aspects of its work,
they were there but they were very much a sort of "bolt-on".
We have heard about silos a lot today, and essentially they were
in very deep, very well-protected silos within MAFF. I think the
creation of DEFRA has gone a long way towards breaking down those
silos, certainly in terms of the senior management structure,
it is very clear that there is a lot of team working and joint
vision going on at the senior level; it does not mean that there
is not an element of silo still left within the new Department,
but we think certainly the mechanisms for breaking that down are
already in train. And, of course, it is very early days, in terms
of DEFRA as a new Department, they have not had very long, particularly
with foot and mouth on the agenda last year, to implement this
work. So we see encouraging first signs.
172. You refer to the comments I made before,
when you sat at the back of the hall, about silo thinking, which
I think was a phrase that was used by the RSPB last week, but
if I could just read a short quote from evidence they gave last
week, and see if you want to react to that, because they did make
a comment that, "Despite the progressive rhetoric of the
Ministerial and Management Board, there is worrying evidence that
the inertia and narrow world view towards agriculture shown by
the former MAFF is still pervasive at a lower level within the
Department." I think you have touched slightly on that, that
you feel that is still there, but I get the impression that you
feel some progress is being made?
(Mr Trow) I think it is important, that we should
say that most of our relationship with DEFRA tends to be into
the Rural Development Service and the Land Use and Rural Affairs
Land Use Directorate. Within those areas, I think, we really are
seeing quite a lot of culture change, increasingly. We have less
well-developed links to the Agriculture and Farming Directorate,
and perhaps that is an indication of the fact that those silos
still exist, to a certain extent; and we have not got such well
developed links to the Environment Protection Directorate, they
are increasingly improving. So it may well be that there is a
different culture within different Directorates at DEFRA, I do
not think necessarily we are the best people to comment on all
of the Directorates.
173. On the Directorates that you are actually
dealing with where you feel there is some movement, is that movement
coming from within the officers level that you are actually dealing
with, or is there a clear lead coming from above to change the
culture?
(Mr Trow) I think it is a mixture of both, I think
there is evidence of a clear lead coming from above. I think,
like any organisation, different officers are reacting differently
and the pace of change possibly is variable. I think some of the
moves that were made in the reorganisation have been very positive
in stimulating a change of view. The reabsorption of the Farming
and Rural Conservation Agency back into the Department, as the
Rural Development Service, I think, has brought in a lot of fairly
creative thinking individuals that are acting as a catalyst within
the Department; so, certainly within that Department, I see it
happening at a number of levels.
Diana Organ
174. Talking about silos and things, it makes
you wonder whether English Heritage are going to make them a listed
building; we have been talking about silos all morning, and you
feel that somehow they actually are physical structures, not sort
of ways of people operating. You talked about how you tend to
deal mostly with the Rural Development Service and the Rural Affairs
Directorate, but do not have at present very good links with the
Environment Protection Directorate. I wonder if you could tell
me, if you are looking at something, a building or a structure
that you have an interest in, and you are concerned about what
is going to happen to it and how that would link in with DEFRA's
work, is it easier for you to go to just one official, or do you
have to do the runaround and talk to four or five, or do you find
that it is not very organised to interface with you?
(Mr Trow) Generally speaking, I find there is quite
a lot of clarity in the new structure, the structure that was
established, I think, by November 2001; and, indeed, DEFRA have
gone out of their way to provide aids for the outside world to
begin to understand their structure, clear organograms and aids
in that way; so I find that we are fairly easily directed towards
the right person. In some topics, there seem to be several fingers
in a particular pie, and it is not necessarily always easy to
look laterally and find out who the right people are.
175. You are actually making it sound much easier
than possibly members of the public find, when they are trying
to talk to somebody in DEFRA; obviously, they have given you information
that "them out there" do not have. You talked about
having some aids, it is quite easy, and you think that they have
actually thought about this, but in some areas they have not.
I wonder if you could just give me some pointers as to where you
have difficulty and why that might be so?
(Mr Trow) A particular case where we were perhaps
less pleased with outcomes was the recent discussions around the
environmental impact assessment of uncultivated land and semi-natural
areas,[3]
where I think, there, we felt that the broader commitment and
wider thinking about sustainability that is going on in the Department
perhaps had not permeated into that particular area of discussion.
Mr Breed
176. It is very nice to see English Heritage
here. I represent a Cornish constituency; you will know there
are a considerable number of people down there that do not recognise
English Heritage and do their best to destroy all your signs,
for which I apologise. To what extent did you used to relate to
MAFF and DETR, did you used to have quite a lot of discussions
and did you interface with them to any reasonable extent?
(Mr West) I think it would be fair to say, we interfaced
better with the old DETR than we did with MAFF, but I think it
is true across Whitehall, in recent years, that the degree of
interdepartmental consultation and, dare I say, joined-up thinking,
even, across Whitehall, has actually been improving steadily over
recent years, and our relations with MAFF, as I think I said at
the beginning, were improving considerably, even before DEFRA
was created. I do not know whether Steve wants to add anything
to that.
(Mr Trow) Certainly, to reiterate the point that there
was a change already, not least as a result of foot and mouth.
To a certain extent, we see the creation of DEFRA as the culmination
of one process as well as the beginning of another.
177. So you had more involvement with DETR than
you did with MAFF?
(Mr Trow) Certainly; because of the planning issues,
we were . . .
178. Bearing in mind that, and the last year,
or so, of DEFRA, and everything else, and putting any Department
together and all the sort of problems that it has got, overall,
what is your impression of the way in which the Department has
managed to keep its people, attract the right quality, keep all
the people it wants, or do you get the impression that, over the
last year, because of a number of difficulties, the mergers, and
everything else, there has been a sort of drain away, on staff,
that you are beginning to find not the people that you used to
deal with in DETR, and such? What is your overall impression of
the strengths of the Department, in staff terms, now, as opposed
to what you used to deal with in DETR?
(Mr Trow) In terms of the areas of the Department
we deal with, I think there has been a remarkable amount of continuity,
in terms of staff, to be quite honest. Certainly, the main changes
at the senior, Board level are the main changes that we have been
aware of, and we have certainly been very impressed by the calibre
and the thinking of the staff that have come in there. At a lower
level, there have been staff changes but they have been more rotations
between different parts of the Department than rotations out of
the Department, as far as we are aware.
179. So, as far as your dealings are concerned
anyway, you have been able to maintain good contact with the ones
that you want to, and there has been no particular problem there,
and whilst lower down there may have been some problems, in terms
of retaining staff, it has not had any significant effect on your
dealings with DEFRA, in any sense?
(Mr Trow) No; we have tended to be able to find who
we needed to talk to.
3 Note by Witness: The Environmental Impact
Assessment (Uncultivated Land and Semi-natural Areas) (England)
Regulations 2001. Back
|
